Illinois State SenateCandidato para Distrito 22

I fully support term limits for legislators as our framers’ intended, but especially in leadership. The state is suffering in the hands of long-termed career politicians and a ruling-class party with no intention to share in leadership or bi-partisan succession planning. This has bred partisanship and it fully detracts from fair, deliberate and balanced public policy making. The consideration of bi-partisan, termed leadership from all districts around the state would also mitigate the conflict of interest among officials and legislators. Such moves would go a long way to restore trust in our government especially in the wake of the 2014 Illinois Supreme Court decision to throw out 600,000 signatures petitioning for term limits, and recently, a similar decision to toss out nearly the same number for an Independent Maps Amendment. Put government back into the hands of the people, not the politically powerful elite.

There’s plenty of blame to go around, but I believe that legislators put election interests ahead of the taxpayers. They settled on introducing a “spending plan” that still had a $7 billion dollar deficit and then a “Stopgap budget” that still leaves taxpayers, education and human services with no sense of stability. Springfield must get back to the table and agree upon reasonable reforms for pensions, workman’s compensation and local governments some measure of negotiating control. These are reasonable and will support a more business friendly environment that will expand opportunity, promote economic growth, create jobs and broaden the tax base that will restore prosperity to Illinois.

Higher education is dying primarily because of escalating costs, unfunded pension promises, student debt and more students examining the cost-benefit analysis. Few would argue that higher education provides better job opportunities and earnings potential, but it is also incumbent upon our institutions to be nimble enough to provide educations that are transferrable into the workplace. Many offer vocational programs to ensure work-force ready graduates in industries such as transportation, the building trades, manufacturing and health sciences. However, each college and university must also be nimble in their reaction to trends impacting their finances such as the budget crisis in Illinois, perhaps moving away from greater dependence on public funding. Depending on MAP grants, or making risky moves such as floating those funds while waiting for the state, puts the student and taxpayer in peril. While temporary cuts may be necessary, I believe the state should eventually restore MAP funding to institutions that can respond to the need for jobs in Illinois.

The primary problem with the General State Aid formula is that it remains in the hands of politicians and special interests who pick “winners and losers”. The bulk of the money that comes out of GSA is funneled into Chicago and suburban school districts. Unfortunately, property tax cap laws in certain districts allow for students in those districts to get a higher and more disproportionate amount of aid than others. For example, a Chicago student receives a GSA tax subsidy of $811, whereas the downstate student receives $25. The existing system in Illinois should be scrapped in favor of an equitable program where local control of the educational dollar is put into the hands of the parents. The wheel doesn’t need to be reinvented. Some have recommended that we look at one of our neighboring states such Wisconsin for successful alternative programs. We should also consider recent evidence based reports that include simplified formulas that could provide equitable funding for every child in the state based on needs.

Before we begin talking about more revenue (taxes), let’s talk about spending and then the budget. We must address reforms for pension, workers compensation and a bloated bureaucracy. We should be looking for ways to streamline government operations and services, thus creating better outcomes of service and lowering the costs to taxpayers. Rather than the usual knee-jerk response of raising taxes on the backs of families, businesses and commerce, create a more business friendly environment that will broaden the tax base. Increased growth, opportunities and jobs is what Illinois needs.

I do not support this measure as a constitutional amendment. Funds raised and appropriated for transportation or anything else should not require a special constitutional protection if we are acting ethically and wholly within the interest of good public policy. Recognizing the importance of a good transportation system to any economy, we will still invest and do this by exercising exemplary stewardship of transportation revenue. Taxpayers should not be burdened with fund sweeps to patch holes in the pension funds.

a) Move state employees to 401k-style retirement plans;

b) Reamortize the existing debt into an affordable line item to the state debt;

c) Remove or renegotiate COLA.

I support reasonable reforms in the criminal justice system that would in fact reduce our prison populations and reduce recidivism. Programs to assist non-violent offenders get treatment or rehabilitation, programs for reintegration and employment should be supported by our state and the community at large.

I believe that you are innocent until proven guilty. The seizure of private property without due process or prior to conviction should be forbidden. I would support a reasonable freeze on the transfer of assets while a case is pending, but not an outright seizure.

I support the health, safety and dignity of all persons, including the transgendered. However, my concern with HB6073 is the opportunity for unintended consequences when a document such as a birth certificate, is not reflective of the natural, biological and anatomical characteristics of a male, born male, or a female, born female; or when sex-affirmation, reassignment surgery has not been made. So the bigger question is, does HB6073 truly protect the health, safety and dignity for all persons, including our transgendered always? Specifically, would transgender persons receive the appropriate, urgent medical care in an emergency and they were unresponsive? In our transient world, would they be subject to discrimination, harassment or worse when traveling to other states or countries without similar legislation? I have concerns that HB6073 could be exploited by any persons with less honorable intentions or to dodge the law, especially because of the gender fluidity the bill provides for.

Life is precious and I personally support life from “womb to tomb”. However, when our terminally ill are suffering and death is clearly imminent, I believe that legal options be made available so that they may exercise any final decisions for their lives with dignity. I believe that consciously prepared advance directives from the terminally ill person for their family and physicians should be a requirement for this option to avoid issues that may arise from ambiguity. 

First, enforce the Federal Laws we already have and prosecute offenders accordingly, keeping criminals and illegal guns off the street. More laws do not stop criminals from securing guns illegally, and only serve to infringe upon the rights of law-abiding citizens. However, I would support closely examining the current laws for straw purchases to ensure that they are effective without unintentionally criminalizing otherwise law-abiding citizens. Second, I wholly support community based programs that put an emphasis on restoring values that teach non-violent conflict resolution.

I support wages that are commensurate with the type of job and influenced by local economic conditions and what the marketplace will bear. First, because the cost of living varies across the state, a mandatory increase in the minimum wage would be over-burdensome for downstate employers compared to those in Chicago. Second, we should not be conflating minimum wage with living wage: low-skilled and entry-level jobs provide workers with experience and flexibility, and should be a springboard to higher-earning jobs. These are jobs meant for people just entering the workforce, not life-long careers. Mandating wages would force employers to reduce their workforce and/or eliminate other meaningful benefits. That would lead to dollars being extracted from the local economy and higher unemployment, especially among our youth.  The better question is how do we increase the number of job opportunities in Illinois that provide actual living wages and benefits for families?

Can legislation get much more ridiculous? Of course I oppose a “nanny” tax such as this. We are a people who still remain free to choose what they want to eat and drink without the interference of government. I support manufacturers and businesses that distribute these beverages without the imposition of yet another tax.

I have some concerns about these initiatives. I support the idea of alternate energy sources, as long as the legislative playing field for all energy producers is level and taxpayers are left off the hook of subsidization. Proponents of the proposed Clean Jobs Bill, “promises” to create as many as 32,000 of new jobs if it’s passed, yet don’t comment on the loss of jobs in other energy sectors. Supporters also claim that passage of the bill will cause energy demand to decrease by twenty percent by the year 2025 and would "enable solar and wind energy projects to flourish." However, under Illinois’ energy efficiency law, utility companies pass on new costs to customers. Therefore, if the Clean Jobs Bill passed, households and businesses using electricity will still pay more money to subsidize the cost of wind turbines and other renewable energy sources such as solar and hydroelectric.